Kathy has several dogs. Her white standard poodle has typical "poodle ears" with some stains discoloring his fur in his ears. She asked me if this could be a "low level" condition similar to what Rico had. I told her to try the commercial product from Stone and see what would happen.
I was chatting with her on the phone last night, and she mentioned that she had started Poo on the Oti-ClO2 product from Stone. I suggested that she check the poodles ears with cotton swabs to see where we were at.
She has been regularly checking Rico's ears and is now developing a new appreciation of what clean ears are. She always thought that some level of discoloration and oozing was "normal" and was the main reason you regularly clean the ears. Since Rico's experience, she is now seeing that her original ideas may be flawed and she is reviewing her ideas on this.
At any rate, after 2 treatments, Poo's ears are clean. They are as clean as Rico's ears are. They are cleaner than they ever have been in spite of regularly having his ears cleaned with normal cleaners.
She was afraid that the lower strength solution from Stone would not be effective. I told her that it doesn't take much. We blasted Rico's ears because he was in a very advanced condition and didn't have much time. In normal use, the commercial product, with its lower chlorine dioxide levels, should work fine. It appears that it does.
This is not a glamorous story, and we don't have over 25 pages of medical records to back it up. However, it does show that chlorine dioxide is so powerful that only low concentrations are required in "normal" use.
Once again, the other ear cleaners do a good job of cleaning the gunk out of the ears, but do nothing for infections. Chlorine dioxide solutions quickly kill off infections, but they are not the best for cleaning out the ears. The idea is to recognize the differences and treat accordingly.